The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has held that it had no jurisdiction to entertain a party’s appeal of an order compelling arbitration under one agreement where the party sought to argue that the lower court should have ordered arbitration under a separate arbitration agreement.

In Adams v. Monumental General Casualty Co., No. 07-14547, 2008 WL 4051030 (11th Cir. Sept. 2, 2008), Adams entered into a retail installment contract to finance the purchase of a truck and an associated insurance policy from Monumental. Both the retail contract and the insurance policy issued by Monumental contained an arbitration agreement. After Adams paid off the loan early, she sued Monumental to recover a portion of the premium she had paid. Monumental moved to compel arbitration. The district court granted the motion.

However, the district court later amended its opinion to eliminate references to the retail contract as "unnecessary dicta," ostensibly ordering arbitration to proceed in accordance with the agreement in the insurance policy. Monumental appealed the district court’s order, asking the court to compel arbitration under both agreements.

The Court held it was without jurisdiction to decide the issue once the district court compelled arbitration under 9 U.S.C. § 16(b)(2). "When a district court compels arbitration of a dispute under one contract and is silent about whether another contract provides for arbitration of the same dispute," the Court held that the provision allowing appeal of an order denying arbitration under 9 U.S.C. § 16(b)(1) "is not implicated," and that the district court’s order was "unreviewable."